'It seems like a luxury to be able to offer that': Factors influencing the implementation of annual health checks for autistic people in England.
Jade Davies, Anna Remington, Carole Buckley and 2 others
PMID 37431819WHAT IT FOUND
Primary-care staff and autistic adults generally backed proposed autism-specific annual health checks, but time and staff shortages made them seem a luxury.
Autistic adults described phone appointments, short visits, and communication barriers as access problems.
Key findings
01149 of 195 survey participants said they would be likely to implement autism-specific annual health checks if NHS England recommended them.
02Participants said they did not have enough staff to offer autism-specific annual health checks, and one primary-care professional called doing them a luxury.
03Autistic adults described phone-only appointments, short consultations, busy waiting rooms, and difficulty explaining their needs as barriers to accessing primary care.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study explored a proposed policy that had not been implemented, so participants were predicting barriers and facilitators rather than describing real-world delivery. The autistic sample was small (n = 10) and all participants reported a White ethnic background, so it may not represent autistic people from other groups. Recruitment happened during the coronavirus pandemic, which took longer and yielded fewer participants than expected. The study was limited to GP practices in England, and local practice resources and culture varied. No autistic people were involved in designing or conducting the research, although phase 1 autistic participants informed the survey. The paper did not test whether autism-specific annual health checks improve health outcomes or whether the suggested implementation strategies work. Phase 1 participant counts are reported inconsistently: methods list 11 primary-care professionals and 10 autistic adults, while the phase 1 table caption states n = 22.
Declared interests
The supplied text says the authors disclosed receipt of financial support for the research, authorship, or publication, but it does not name the funder or list specific conflicts. One author is a GP, was the Royal College of General Practitioners clinical representative for autism, and is the parent of an autistic person; this author contributed to study design, recruitment, interpretation, and review.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that autism-specific annual health checks improve health outcomes or that the suggested implementation strategies work. The study reports expectations about a proposed policy and did not test the checks.